Тўхтамурод Олимович Қўчқоров

Abdullaev Amirullo Khazratovich
(Tashkent State Uzbek Language and Literature
University Independent Researcher)


PROBLEMS OF MUTUAL TRANSLATION OF THE MEANING OF "STYLE OF MOVEMENT" IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES
ANNOTATION
The article examines the problem of mutual translation of tokens with movement meaning in English and Uzbek. This includes ensuring the formal and stylistic balance between the original and the translation, correctly determining the position of lexemes in the gradonymic sequence in the reflection of the meaning of the style, and finding and using the same equivalent in the language of translation.


Keywords: style category, pragmatics, proposition, concept, adequate, presupposition, verbal and nonverbal means, implicit, explicit, linguocultural.
Language is a means for the speaking nation to understand existence, a means for the emergence and formation of ideas, an impulse for the spiritual maturity of man. Indeed, while language can be a means for a nation to understand and describe an entity, it can also be an element of an ontological nature that embodies the psyche, concepts, and values of that nation. Spontaneously, a number of problems also arise in the process of intelligibly translating a text representing the national identity of one language into another culture.
It is known that "in translation studies, the norm of translation, ie its adequacy, is determined by compliance with a number of requirements for the quality of translation." These requirements aim to preserve as much as possible the syntactic, lexical, semantic, communicative, and pragmatic features of the text. At the same time, depending on the degree of brotherhood of languages, the ability to retain certain features in translation varies. In particular, since it is natural for the syntactic parameters of the text to change in mutual translations into English and Uzbek, which are incompatible languages, it can be said that the issue of maintaining this feature of the text is not a problem for the translator. However, as noted above, given that the language reflects the cultural and spiritual identity of the nation, the spirit and way of life of the nation, the issue of giving the style and vocabulary of the original as an alternative to the original is also somewhat problematic. Indeed, concepts that form positive impressions in the mind of one nation can cause negative or moderate feelings for another nation. The structural and linguistic and cultural differences in the English and Uzbek languages, which are incompatible and culturally distant from each other, are becoming more apparent, especially in the translation process.
When translating from a philological point of view, preserving the formal features of the original becomes a priority for the translator, that is, the syntactic relationship between the original and the translated text is of paramount importance. According to the sources, it is a syntactic concept that a type of situation is presented in a certain sentence scheme as a simple proposition (a systematic combination of meanings). The type of situation reflects the harmony of the subjects and their relationship. Thus, in the method of philological translation, it can be said that the translator seeks to ensure the integrity of this syntactic concept. As we study the meanings of the style at the lexical level, it is observed that the lexemes that express these meanings can perform the functions of case, cut, determiner, and complement. By itself, it is necessary to determine to what extent it is possible to maintain syntactic proportions in the translation of these means, that is, to maintain the balance between the translation and the original text in translating the meanings of the style. This is because the translation of English and Uzbek texts, which are structurally distant from each other, while maintaining a syntactic pattern, has a significant impact on the communicative features of the text. The following are cases in which the syntactic differences in the translation of a literary text from Uzbek into English may affect the communicative properties of the text: As the train sped away, hearts began to pound. Early in the morning, the guards, tired of sitting around the table and eating and drinking, finally snorted, cleared their throats, and waved their hands behind the train. (M. Sharif, “Memories of Said Ahmad”) \\ Finally, we were ticked off the list one more time and got on the train. It started with noise and a whistle. We were followed by the waving well-wishers, who were struggling with belching. They had been there since early morning, sitting around a rich dastarkhan and were already quite sick and tired of everything. My heart pounded with excitement. 2. The train gathered troops and went to Tashkent, then to Termez, and finally to Turkmenistan. Our time on the train was spent eating and discussing what awaited us in the army. Each soldier's sack was full of food, from loaves of bread to meat and worms. The pockets are full of money. At that time, escorting young men to the army became a big ceremony, and all the relatives of the former handed over money to the soldier. Most of these teenagers, who recently graduated from school, have never seen enough money to get married and get married. (Memories of M. Sharif, Said Ahmad) \\ The train, collecting conscripts along the way, passed through Tashkent, Termez, and finally headed towards Turkmenistan. Throughout the journey we ate, chatted and imagined what awaited us in the army. Each conscript had a backpack stuffed to the gunnels with food, baked bread wrapped in hot ashes and fatty mutton to kurut and sultanas. Pockets, full of money, bulged. In those days, seeing the army was a big event, each well-wisher or relative presented a future soldier with money. Teens, who had just graduated from school, had never held so much money in their hands.
In general, descriptions have a special place in Uzbek literature, and this descriptive coloring, which is considered to be the influence of classical literature, affects the syntactic features of the text, making sentences and sentences more complex, cohesive parts and adjectives. Translating sentences into English as they really are, from the recipient's point of view, undermines the communicative properties of the text. On the contrary, in English fiction we do not observe the same descriptiveness as in Uzbek. English fiction, whether modern or classical, is based on "plot art", in which the emotionality, color and descriptive features of the text become a secondary issue.
Due to the mismatch between the formal and semantic parameters of the above statements, the Uzbek reader may find in the literal translation of these statements an emotionally neutral, in a sense, artistic rhetoric. The examples do not describe how the movement took place, but are limited to the use of other descriptive elements. It should be noted that such delineation and the pursuit of brevity are not a separate style of writing, but a characteristic feature of most English literary texts.
Thus, in works translated from Uzbek into English, the richness of the text to the descriptive elements, in particular, to the means of expression, makes it difficult for the reader to accept the translation. Conversely, the fact that English literary texts are devoid of descriptive elements leads to a decline in the poetics of works of art that are familiar to Uzbek librarians in their Uzbek translations. While it is difficult for an English reader to understand complex syntactic devices, it is difficult for an Uzbek student to accept a text devoid of descriptive elements.
On the basis of this problem, another issue arises. The study of cognitive processes in linguistics has inevitably had an impact on translation studies. In the process of searching for adequate translation solutions, not only the degree of equivalence of a medium in two opposing languages, but also the proportionality, asymmetry, interdependence and interdependence of the conceptual space between them. The understanding that language is a means of expression, a means of expressing verbal and nonverbal knowledge, has led to the study of the structure and interaction of different types of knowledge in different linguocultures. Also, the linguistic description of the world, which is one of the basic concepts of cognitive linguistics, is formed on the basis of the idea that each nation describes the world differently, depending on its historical experience, way of life and national identity. In the end, different nations describe existence in their own way, proving that the concepts in it are contradictory, and that the concept of one language does not exist in another language at all. In this context, conceptual differences between languages ​​and conceptual gaps in the translation of style meanings are likely to cause problems in the translation process. For example: 1. Our grandfather, who was seventy years old, said this to his grandmother. Our grandfather opened his mouth wide. They turned their right ears to the sixties. The years did not bring bright voices. Our grandfather put his right palms out of his ears. They took refuge. They could not breathe. They listened with all their might. Our grandfather still did not hear anything. They took a deep breath. (Tugai Murod, “People walking on the moon”) \\ Our grandfather who was lying down on the hill said these words to our grandmother. Our grandfather surprisingly opened his mouth. He began to listen to the side where breezes blew. But breezes did not bring the voices clearly. So our grandfather put his palm onto his ears. He tried to protect the audible voice from the wind. He did not breathe and listened with all his heart. Even now he could not hear anything. He inhaled fresh air. 2. When Yunus Rajabi sings, it is not permissible to shoot a smiling person. He listens to Yunus Rajabi's songs with his head bowed. He sings! He goes to the fire in Adir. The fire burns and burns around. He will be alone. Then he cuts the grass. He puts his hands under his head. He sings to the distant, to the white clouds of the cotton fields, to the flocks of sparrows. (Togai Murod, “Oydinda yurgan odamlar”) \\ He dislikes seeing someone chatting or coughing when he listens to Yunus Rajabi's songs. He annoys seeing someone smiling when Yunus Rajbi sings. He listens to Yunus Rajabi's songs quietly. He sings a song! He goes to hills to gather fodder. He gathers fodder and looks around. He will be alone there. Then he makes a pillow from the fodder. He crosses his hands under his head. He looks at far distances - white clouds like a bale of cotton and flying sparrows and sings.
It is clear that the figurative features of the lexemes with the style meaning in the above examples are unfamiliar to the English reader. In this case, the imposition of the meaning of the style on other elements leads to a violation of the formal and stylistic balance between the original and the translation.
The next issue is directly related to the lexical features of the lexical level of languages. In this case, it is important for the translator to correctly determine the position of lexemes in the gradonymic sequence in the translation of the meaning of the style, to find and use the same equivalent in the language of translation.
It is known that in each language the lexemes denoting movement are distinguished from other categories by their semantic superiority and polyfunctionality. Language is a means of communication, language is a convenient means of expressing thoughts through speech in a way that can be understood by others. As each language goes through stages of development, it becomes richer in polysemantic words. These polysemantic words cause difficulties in the translation process. The meaning of these words is used in other languages ​​with verbs of different personal and tense categories, and has its own distinctive features. One of the most difficult situations in the translation of verbs of action is the translation, while retaining its own lexical meaning, as well as contextual meaning, tense, personal categories and style. In most cases, the action verb has more than one of the indicators listed above. This polysemantism, in turn, causes difficulties in the process of translating from Uzbek to English. This is because, in some cases, it is possible to translate the lexical meaning of the action verb through the English verb movement, but it may not have a stylistic meaning in the context of the same translation unit.
It follows that one of the problems that arises in the process of mutual translation of stylistic devices is the semantic disproportion of lexical means.
It is well known that the translation of a work of art is so different from a literal translation that in most cases the translation of a literary text may not correspond to the original. The purpose of this translation is to convey the original meaning to the representatives of the language being translated. Literary translation differs from the translation of a scientific or journalistic text in its relative freedom. Such a translation becomes communicative when the translator aims to translate each word in the text not in isolation, but in harmony. In other words, the goal of translation is to translate the general meaning of the text in an adequate, understandable way for the reader, even if it excludes the formal balance between the original and the text. In this case, the translator has the right to choose the communicative approach in the process and make free changes to the text. By itself, in the text, in most cases, secondary means of description, in particular, units of expression, can be used outside the scope of the translator. At the same time, in order to improve the poetics of the translated text, the translator has the right to include additional descriptive units, including means of stylistic expression. In this case, the problem is that the translator is able to correctly determine in which case the descriptive means of the text, that is, the unit of expression, is of pragmatic importance, and the implicit and explicit features of this means. In other words, the translator is left with the question of whether or not it is necessary to translate the meaning of the original style, and whether it is necessary to add the meaning of the style to the translated text.
At the same time, we see that descriptive expressions are not widely used in English literary texts, in particular, the existing action lexemes are moderate in terms of style semantics. For example: Presently he turned a bend and was lost to sight, but Alix still stayed in the same position, absent-mindedly smoothing a lock of the rich brown hair which had blown across her face, her eyes far-away and dreamy. (A.Christie, “Philomel Cottage”) // Alix Martin leaned against a small, rough window and watched from behind her husband, who was walking down the path leading to the village. Here, her husband disappeared in a turn, and Alix, as he stood there, kissed the pomegranate's cheeks and began to straighten his brown hair. (Agatha Christie, Nightingale's Nest. Translator R. Jabborov). In the process of communicative translation, of course, it is necessary to determine the urgency of adding these descriptive tools to the text. The action lexemes in the above examples can be enriched descriptively when translated into Uzbek. Of course, it is necessary to think about how much the means included in the translated text support its general meaning in the original, and to what extent these added units can express the presupposition of the text.
The degree to which the translated text is authentic has also been the subject of heated debate among ancient translators. It is on the basis of such debates that the theory of "non-translation" has emerged. According to this theory, it is impossible to make a complete translation from one language to another, due to the fact that the means of expression of different languages ​​differ significantly from each other. Thus, the fact that the translation does not seem to be the essence of the originality does not give a complete picture of the originality of the translation. In some literatures, it has been suggested that any developed national language has sufficient means to fully translate the content expressed in another language. A separate analysis of both views reveals the following problems in the translation process, in particular in the translation of the means of expression, that is, the meanings of the style:
first, the difficult task of maintaining a syntactic balance between the original and the translated text in the method of philological translation;
secondly, it is almost impossible to preserve the descriptive aspect of the original text in both Uzbek and English translated texts;
thirdly, it may be difficult to determine the place of a lexeme in the grammatical order according to the style meaning of the original style, to find and use a unit in the language of translation with the same degree of color;
fourthly, when the meaning of a style is expressed by means of action verbs, it may be impossible to preserve all the polysemantic features of the verb, to use the opposite participle in the translated text, which contains all its grammatical categories and semantics;
fifth, when choosing a method of communicative translation, the translator should determine which means of descriptive expression in the Uzbek literary text perform an important pragmatic function, and, if necessary, use some units of expression when translating into English. In the process of translating from English to Uzbek, there is a need to identify the movement by introducing a means of expression.